Wikipǣdia:Bēna tō and fram bewitendhāde

Requests for adminship (RfA) is the process by which the Wikipedia community decides who will become administrators (also known as admins or sysops), who are users with access to additional technical features that aid in maintenance. A user either submits his/her own request for adminship (a self-nomination) or is nominated by another user. Please be familiar with the administrators' reading list, how-to guide, and guide to requests for adminship before submitting your request.

Administrator status is granted to known and trusted members of the community who are familiar with Wikipedia policies. Administrators have no special authority on Wikipedia, but are held to higher standards, because they are perceived by many, particularly new, users as the official face of Wikipedia. Therefore they should take care to be courteous, and exercise good judgment and patience in dealing with other users. Nominees should have been on Wikipedia long enough for people to see whether they have these qualities. Most new administrators have over three months of participation and over 1000 edits. You may nominate yourself, but it is advisable to exceed usual expectations before doing so.

Nominations remain for seven days so the community can vote and comment on the nomination. Bureaucrats may extend this when consensus is unclear (because consensus is subjective, bureaucrats have some discretion, but the threshold on this page is roughly 80% support). Nominations which are clearly not going to gain sufficient support may be removed earlier to prevent discussions that generate ill will; however, as most editors don't visit Wikipedia daily, a reasonable amount of time should be allowed. Some people oppose early removal under any circumstances. If your nomination is rejected, please wait a reasonable period of time before applying again (at least one month is generally expected).

To add your vote, edit the section for that candidate. You may add a short comment to your vote, but discussion and responses to other comments belong in the Comments section below every nomination. When voting, please update the vote tally of the nomination that you are voting in. The vote tally format is as follows: (Support/Oppose/Neutral).

Anonymous users cannot be nominated, nominate others, or vote. They are allowed to comment.

I would like to nominate Espreon for adminship. He is one of the most active users and has proposed many pages for deletion. His work as a temporary sysop on ang.wiktionary has been great, and I think angwiki would similarly benefit from his adminship here. PiRSquared17 (talk) 03:15, 26 Gēolmōnaþ 2013 (UTC)

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Successful: On such a small wiki, I think that the time I've allotted to this RFA was enough for the 3-4 active users here to either support or raise a concern. Therefore, I've closed this as successful and will alert the stewards so they can make the final decision and promotion. fr33kman-simpleWP- 02:02, 1 Wēodmōnaþ 2010 (UTC)

Wōdenhelm contacted me the other day after noticing that I am a global sysop. He emailed me asking if I could make him an admin here. I informed him stewards would need to do that and it'd need to be based on community consensus. You currently have two admins neither of whom has made an edit since the later part of 2009. Since Wōdenhelm has indicated he would like to be a sysop here, and since he is active, I'd recommend you consider whether or not you'd like to have him as a sysop. I'd also encourage one or two others to run for sysop at the same time, and to discuss desysopping the two inactive admins. Thank you for allowing me to intrude on your wiki! :) fr33kman-simpleWP- 22:35, 27 Mǣdmōnaþ 2010 (UTC)

Nomination comments from last timeI would like to go up for Administration status because of my passion for this Wikipedia project and for my contributions. I will list my reasons below:

My personal passion and dedication to the project.

My numerous contributions to the project, of various topics.

Continual revisions of various project pages, with respect to their length and content.

Creating nearly word-for-word translations, to make pages of equal quality to their Modern English counterparts.

I check Recent Changes every single day, to monitor for quality edits, and to be on the lookout for vandalism.

My creations of several categories, and linking them into a proper hierarchy of categories and sub-categories.

I'd also support Wodenhelm going into sysopship. As a natural other choice, I think it would be well to have Hogweard as the "oneor two other" to be up for sysopship. Willcume ic þec on míne brúcendsídan! 06:38, 28 Mǣdmōnaþ 2010 (UTC)

You guys also need to talk about removing the current two admins, if you wish. fr33kman-simpleWP- 18:45, 28 Mǣdmōnaþ 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, that would certainly be sensible, as this would allow solely those involved in the project to be able to maintain it properly, according to its own direction. — ᚹᚩᛞᛖᚾᚻᛖᛚᛗ (ᚷᛖᛋᛈᚱᛖᚳ) 18:50, 28 Mǣdmōnaþ 2010 (UTC)

(outdent)I'll leave these RFAs up until Sun 1st Aug 2010. After that time, I'll close them and then inform the stewards that they need to give the sysop right to the new admins. We also need to set up a dual RFDA (Request for deadministration) for the current admins. Be back on 1st :) fr33kman-simpleWP- 04:24, 30 Mǣdmōnaþ 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Self-nominators, please review the qualifications above. Some editors feel that self-nominees should "exceed the usual guidelines by a good measure," have an account name that is many months old and have many hundreds of edits. This is not to say that self-nominators are necessarily any less qualified than "sponsored" nominations; however, some editors use their knowledge of the nominator as a "jumping off" point for considering nominees. Most voters can be presumed to consider all nominees on their own merits, and there are even a few who look with special favor on self-nominations as expressing a suitable independence. A good solid background is equally important for both kinds of nomination.

Please add new requests at the top of this section immediately below (and again, please update the headers when voting)

I would like to request my admin status be restored/renewed for ang.wiki. I pretty much created the wiki, and I've gotten back into OE, and would like to do some serious editing, expansion, and cleaning throughout this wiki to make it a big-tier wiki! --James (talk) 15:34, 11 Þrimilcemōnaþ 2014 (UTC)

Endorse and recommend steward to grant for 6-12 months time as editor has been highly active on this project for years. fr33kman-simpleWP- 11:21, 15 Blōtmōnaþ 2010 (UTC)

I'm not very active here and I do not know if I can vote but you have my moral support. Wōdenhelm has done a good job here and as far as I can see he's used the tools correctly on his previous term. No reason not to renew his term again. Thanks, --Dferg 10:18, 19 Blōtmōnaþ 2010 (UTC)

I'd like to re-nominate myself for admin. Both I and my mother were in the hospital and rehab for quite a while and thus I was unable to contribute for quite a while. I would like to have admin-ship restored, and get back into the swing of things. --James 17:30, 31 Hrēþmōnaþ 2011 (UTC)

Comment please sign the above using your user account. You were logged out when you made this request. Let me know when you've signed it. Best, fr33kman-simpleWP- 20:59, 29 Hrēþmōnaþ 2011 (UTC)

Support I am happy to see James come back as an admin, providing he is reasonably active. (And, of course, he still needs to sign his name.) Ƿes hāl! 21:13, 29 Hrēþmōnaþ 2011 (UTC)

Oppose This user only occasionally surfaces once in a blue moon and only contributes stub articles that are less than 3 sentences long. More work will be needed on their behalf to earn adminship. — ᚹᚩᛞᛖᚾᚻᛖᛚᛗ (ᚷᛖᛋᛈᚱᛖᚳ) 03:20, 30 Hrēþmōnaþ 2011 (UTC)

Support James practically created this Wicipedia and knows more of Englisc than most of us.Hogweard 09:21, 30 Hrēþmōnaþ 2011 (UTC)

Irrelevant, however. Admins need to be either regularly active, or at least regularly monitor the Wiki's recent changes. Over the years, for whatever reason or another, he'd disappear for long periods, months (years?) at a time. — ᚹᚩᛞᛖᚾᚻᛖᛚᛗ (ᚷᛖᛋᛈᚱᛖᚳ) 19:11, 30 Hrēþmōnaþ 2011 (UTC)

Well, absence is why I did not accept Adminship (Þegnscipe?), but if James is indeed back and active, he would seem ideal.Hogweard 19:33, 2 Ēastermōnaþ 2011 (UTC)

As suggested me by PiRSquared17, I'd like to nominate myself for temporary admin, primarily for the purpose of easily editing MediaWiki:Common.css page, because my current work on the front page causes me to need to touch on that. I should say that as of tomorrow, I will be away for most of a week... So youse can discuss it well I'm gone. Ƿes hāl! 10:36, 22 Ēastermōnaþ 2013 (UTC)

Support - would be able to handle some of these requests himself. Gottistgut has been on this wiki since 2009 and has made over 3000 edits, showing a commitment to the community. I'd also support Hogweard and/or Wódenhelm for adminship. PiRSquared17 (talk) 14:59, 22 Ēastermōnaþ 2013 (UTC)

Support His work is of good quality and like Wodenhelm said earlier, he does honest work. I would be pleased to see him as an administrator again on this site. --Stardsen (talk) 12:34, 12 Winterfylleþ 2013 (UTC)

Support Like what everyone else has said, the work he does for this wiki is good and has made this wiki a much better place. Espreon (talk) 15:32, 12 Winterfylleþ 2013 (UTC)

Oppose -

Support The only possible bone I'd have to pick with this decision is the occasional deletion of user pages, which I don't think should ever happen. There was a strange fellow that was rambling about Taylor Swift and an Islamic regime on his page, and that got deleted some time ago, although there was no real attack on anyone, or anything, the reason for deletion given as "vandalisation" or something. I don't think you can really "vandalise" your own user page, so there's no need for that. However, that's nothing compared to the quality of his work, like what Wodenhelm said. HelicopterLlama 14:33, 15 Winterfylleþ 2013 (UTC)

I would like to nominate myself for admin / sysadmin role again. I would need this so that I can add in the runes to the Special Characters section of the Wiki, and help Gottistgut with this wiki.--James (mōtung) 13:27, 1 Wēodmōnaþ 2016 (UTC)

To the best of my knowledge, Remigiu simply performed basic maintenance from afar, in the same spirit of "small wiki watchdogs" or what have you. Now, it's simply not needed. — ᚹᚩᛞᛖᚾᚻᛖᛚᛗ (ᚷᛖᛋᛈᚱᛖᚳ) 06:09, 11 Wēodmōnaþ 2010 (UTC)

It's important to have active and current members to maintain a project according to its own direction. At this point, dis-integration has occurred. — ᚹᚩᛞᛖᚾᚻᛖᛚᛗ (ᚷᛖᛋᛈᚱᛖᚳ) 06:09, 11 Wēodmōnaþ 2010 (UTC)

Needs to be removed as a sysop, very inactive and not showing signs of returning. fr33kman-simpleWP- 01:04, 9 Hāligmōnaþ 2010 (UTC)